US 'not withholding food aid from North Korea'

[clcooper]

I think both of you miss a point, SK can afford to pay us for our services. you miss the point South Korea is not a rich country .

Japan and others step in. that would make Japan happy because they also invaded Korea too .
so glad you like to watch the big bully pick on the small younger kids . when you are big enough stand up against the bully for them

""It would have to be a very serious reason for them to get involved with NK and another conflict with SK and the UN - like an attack on China by the US. ""
i guess the US attacked them first . the first time too that is why the north already had Chinese weapons before we got over there and we were killing Chinese soldiers that was fighting along side the North

SK is a very rich and very industrious country NO THEY ARE NOT .
and can stand on their own without a problem. NO THEY CANT
""They can also pay for us being there which they contribute nothing at this moment. IT isn't our border, it is theirs and the real issue is that we can protect theirs for what ever reason but we refuse to protect ours. ""
WE don't protect it for them . we are there to help if they are ever invaded again .

""Well I don't care, to be exact they can turn to their neighbors to the south for help or even China. ""
who is to their south last i knew it was a ocean to their south . east and west . South Korea can support them self's but can not defend them self's is why we are over there .


""As for a train, we can't build our own here but we can for another country - isn't that a waste of our money. ""

and we did build a trains here and what happened with it . how many people were killed so the train can have their land . how many slaves were killed because of the poor working conditions . so i am SO proud of our train system . but why should i care because we are only talking about South Korea . and the money that we waste over in South Korea not the money that is wasted other places . which at times you don't think it is a waste then but now you do .

Actually no it isn't an invasion, they are still at war. Invasion would imply they are not at war, and there is no aggression on either side - which there is.

what is a cease fire then and to be over 20 years . so when has the South ever been aggressive


The DMZ is a buffer to give them time but it isn't a wall to stop them. Beside I bet the same thing has been initiated by SK too.

The South has not done anything to start any war any where anytime . they are a peaceful people . i was there and would go back .

 

[greg334]

They can defend themselves.

They can afford to pay us.

Japan is not Japan of 1935, it is a different Japan and the threat to Japan is not SK but NK and their actions with Japan.

So to put this in prospective, and get rid of the BS, here is why I say they can defend themselves and/or pay us.

South Korea ranks 15th of all the worlds countries in GDP by the IMF and the World Bank. They rank 16 in economy stability with only 3.3% of unemployment, 53% industrialize that produce products for a large export market. They are ahead of Switzerland, the Netherlands and South Africa to name a few - each of those countries has a sizable economy the last time I looked. They are not far behind Mexico and Australia in both GDP and economic stability. By the way they have expected over a 6% growth in their economy this year where we have something like 1%.

They have conscription for people under the age of 24. At this moment according to our DoD, they have 10,232,203 people either in military service or able for the military service between the ages of 18 and 49 with 13,954,300 fit for military duty in the same age group. Their military expenditure outside our foreign aid is about 2.9% of their GDP, which means they spend a lot less than they should.

In all honesty, I don't see the struggle between the north and south as others do that has to do a thing with us. we are not Korean, as much as we are not German and if we want to think we have a moral obligation to man a border of another country with no benefit to us, then there is a misplaced moral obligation to ourselves and the world where we are needed. The tangent arguments that many use about China are invalid, the same holds true with Japan and other countries because they have too much to lose with any instability within the region where we wouldn't have that great an impact.

Again if we look at moral obligations as many want to claim, Africa is a good example where we let things happen and then ignored the outcome. More is at stake with groups of people who can't defend themselves, who have no education or opportunities while being killed for the simple fact that they may not belong to a certain tribe.

 

[clcooper]

""Japan is not Japan of 1935, it is a different Japan and the threat to Japan is not SK but NK and their actions with Japan. ""

and why would that be it wont be because the USA
so that is the only year that Japan invaded Korea . so in the short 70 some years compared to the 1000 years before that . Japan is complatly changed then .

show me where you got your informtion . because i dont believe what you say LOL

3.3% of unemployment how do they define their unemployment do they pay the unemploymed like the US does . so how can you tell me that is correct to say they only have that many unemploymed.

have you ever been to South Korea . i have

i do agree we do spend to much on other countries . but with South Korea we cant pull out of there either . the US still needs to be there. what if china starts a war atleast we have some troops close not like in WWll . with Japan . and with the US there it does help keep them from doing something like that . .

YES right now the US needs to worry more about home more then the other coutries . our millatry is not like the old milliatry either back then we went to war to win . now we go to war to make a hand full some money

 

[greg334]

""Japan is not Japan of 1935, it is a different Japan and the threat to Japan is not SK but NK and their actions with Japan. ""

and why would that be it wont be because the USA
so that is the only year that Japan invaded Korea . so in the short 70 some years compared to the 1000 years before that . Japan is complatly changed then .

We were attacked by Japan as you know, we went to war with Japan because we were attacked and Germany declared war on us within the week after we declared war on Japan. North Korea didn't attack the United States, they were involved in a UN instigated Civil War with the South because of the partition of the country based on need to play nation builder with the UN.

Japan change?

Yep it has a lot but it also changed from 1860s to the turn of the 20th century too. Their history isn't killing and war, they've changed directions several times. Trust them? Well I think we can on the world stage at this point.

show me where you got your informtion . because i dont believe what you say LOL

What part?

The GDP info comes from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, with confirmation by the University of Michigan.

The Military Information comes from a few sources, the DoD, the CIA fact book and the EU country profile book.

3.3% of unemployment how do they define their unemployment do they pay the unemploymed like the US does . so how can you tell me that is correct to say they only have that many unemploymed.

Sorry but it is equal to our unemployment numbers - meaning that they adjust it the same way. By the way those numbers also are from the Department of Commerce. 3.3% is what I have found and I think that is reflect some of their culture more than their economic status.

have you ever been to South Korea . i have

Nope, but I have been other places where they need US involvement. It doesn't matter if you were or not to me, those who have told me more than what can be posted on a forum and seem to think that the US involvement should be limited includes one Marine General and several Army intel people.

i do agree we do spend to much on other countries . but with South Korea we cant pull out of there either . the US still needs to be there. what if china starts a war atleast we have some troops close not like in WWll . with Japan . and with the US there it does help keep them from doing something like that . .

The argument used to back that China's interest will cause a war seems to be too old. Have you actually looked at China and the problems they face? IF anything they would strike at NK because of the problems NK can cause with destabilizing the region. Remember that China exports to Japan, SK, Indonesia and most of the Pacific Rim countries and like the money coming in over the idea of taking over the world. I don't see the need for the US to be there when others can do the same job.

Ever work with NATO or the UN?

YES right now the US needs to worry more about home more then the other coutries . our millatry is not like the old milliatry either back then we went to war to win . now we go to war to make a hand full some money

BUT see this is the point, We don't need to station troops on site as we did, technology has changed and our intel has too. We haven't fought a war to win since the one ended in 1945. We haven't been attacked by anyone since 1941 and we haven't declared war on another country since 1943.

Our country needs to look at what we are going to do and how to do it before we jump into another mess. Libya is a great example, no exit strategy, no idea who the 'rebels' are and no idea what they are actually fighting for. Who is to say that SK wouldn't attack Japan where we and the former WW2 allies have a treaty obligation to defend Japan and that would cause us to get into an escalated war.